Bergner v. County of San Mateo

Background

Robert Bergner sued San Mateo County and 50 unnamed individuals after his son, Hunter Bergner, died by suicide while incarcerated at Maguire Correctional Facility, a county-operated jail. Hunter Bergner had been prescribed anti-anxiety medication before his conviction and allegedly asked jail staff for medication after entering custody. The complaint alleged that the jail refused to provide medication or other treatment, that his anxiety and suicidal thoughts worsened, and that he later hanged himself in his cell.

The complaint alleged that the County and jail staff were deliberately indifferent to Hunter Bergner’s suicidal thoughts and thereby caused his death. It also alleged that the conduct deprived Robert Bergner of his familial relationship with his son, under the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The complaint did not identify the 50 unnamed individuals beyond alleging that they were responsible in some manner for the injuries and damages.

Motion to Dismiss

The defendants moved to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), which permits dismissal when a complaint does not state a legally sufficient claim. They argued that the complaint did not allege a County policy, practice, or custom that caused the alleged deliberate indifference. They also argued that the anxiety described in the complaint was not a serious medical need supporting a deliberate-indifference claim.

Court’s Analysis

For a municipality to be liable under § 1983 for a constitutional violation, a plaintiff must allege that an official policy or custom caused the violation. The court held that Robert Bergner had not identified a County policy or custom of denying medication or medical care to inmates experiencing suicidal thoughts. The court also rejected reliance on two other suicides referenced in the opposition brief because the complaint and briefing did not provide analogous facts or a common connection between those cases.

The court separately considered whether the complaint adequately alleged a serious medical need and deliberate indifference. It explained that a serious medical need is a condition for which failing to provide treatment could cause significant additional injury or unnecessary pain. The court focused on whether the complaint adequately alleged that defendants knew or should have known that Hunter Bergner faced a heightened risk of suicide, rather than merely knowing that he experienced anxiety.

The court found the allegations too conclusory. The complaint did not describe the symptoms of increased anxiety or suicidal risk or identify who observed them. It alleged that another inmate saw ligature marks on Hunter Bergner’s neck a day or two before his death and notified unspecified jail staff, but it did not provide details about when the report was made or whether staff had enough time to respond. The court also found that allegations about the lack of medication and Hunter Bergner’s recent conviction did not, by themselves, adequately show that defendants knew or should have known of a heightened suicide risk.

Disposition

The court held that the complaint failed to state a claim against all defendants. It granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss without prejudice. The court did not reach the defendants’ separate argument mentioned in the opinion. Robert Bergner was given 28 days from the filing of the order to file an amended complaint.